Proposal: Add (&) to Data.Function
mgsloan at gmail.com
Tue Nov 20 23:31:15 CET 2012
If you're having bikeshedding problems, I feel bad for you son. Lens got
99 operators, but a (|>) ain't one.
In all seriousness though, in light of edward's detailed reasonings, I'm
fully behind (&) instead of (#). ML-compatibility shouldn't be the
concern, and the happenstance of (&) being relatively unused is a great
opportunity. Frequently used operators with concise meanings should have
concise symbols - works out well!
On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:22 PM, Bryan O'Sullivan <bos at serpentine.com>wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Edward Kmett <ekmett at gmail.com> wrote:
>> $. is kind of the worst of all possible worlds to me.
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Libraries